Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY
Chandrakant Mahilange S/o Shri Shishpal Mahilange – Appellant
Versus
Nageshwari Gahne W/o Chandrakant Mahilange – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of cruelty and behavior change post-marriage. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. need for call detail records to prove allegations. (Para 4) |
| 3. supreme court's interpretation of right to privacy. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. right to privacy in marriage and personal communications. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. dismissal of the petition with no grounds for interference. (Para 15) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.6.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg in Case No. 423 of 2023, whereby the application moved by the petitioner seeking a direction to produce call detail records of the cellphone of his wife has been rejected.
2. The facts of the present case are that the parties were married off on 4.7.2022 according to the Hindu rites and rituals at village Sankara, Police Station Somni, Tehsil and District Rajnandgaon. The petitioner/husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(1a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It is alleged that the respondent/wife visited her parents' house 15 days after the marriage and soon thereafter her behaviour changed drastically. It is further pleaded that the respo
Right to privacy encompasses marital confidentiality, preventing access to spouse's private communications without valid justification or specific claims.
The right to privacy in matrimonial disputes is not absolute and must balance with the right to fair trial, allowing relevant evidence to be admitted even if obtained through means that raise questio....
Court affirmed the necessity of impleading an alleged paramour in divorce proceedings for fair adjudication, emphasizing evidentiary disclosures must balance privacy rights with the right to prove ad....
Preservation of evidence must be relevant to ongoing issues in the case; requests that constitute a roving inquiry and invade privacy rights are not warranted.
Electronic evidence – Right to holding telephone conversation in privacy of one’s home/office without interference can be claimed as a “Right to Privacy”—Telephone tapping/illegal means of collecting....
Tape recordings made without the knowledge of one party infringe their right to privacy and violate constitutional rights, rendering them inadmissible in evidence for deciding divorce petitions under....
Right to privacy – Section 122 of Evidence Act does not touch upon aspect of right to privacy as envisaged under Article 21 of Constitution – Section 122 of Evidence Act recognises right to a fair tr....
Privacy of communication must be respected; inquiries without consent are impermissible.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
